I bought an AMD FX-8150 last year particulary in excitement to use it for future software rasterization experiments. I haven't been able to try any of my software rendering ideas yet, but I'm probably going to start soon (after I finish my current projects). I'm thinking that this processor will be ideal for software rasterization, would you agree? Based on the described bulldozer architecture, it's supposed to be very good for integer math and most people recommend using fixed-point arithmetic for rasterization. That's really the reason I chose to buy it. What do you guys think about this decision?

Edit:Nothing to say? Hmm. *bored*

Anybody else have any interesting plans? I'd like to discuss your ideas.

No, I want to make some fundamental changes to what primitives are that likely cannot be achieved through conventional graphics programming (i.e. even modern shader models). There are still numerous advantages to working with the CPU, at least in the first place. If I have any success then I might transfer my work to a GPGPU basis.

I have been very excited about these indicible ideas for more than 18 months, but I just recently decided to not share them. A small number of researchers have realized very insufficient glimpses of this theoretical ensemble. I don't trust their understanding to appropriately comprehend the theoretical magnitude of this project.

Regardless of how much conceit you suspect I demonstrate here, I will state my perception that many well-respected graphics researchers have unsatisfactorily exhibited naive comprehension and senseless heuristics. I've decided I do not want to share these ideas until I completely implement them properly and to their fullest; myself now understanding how such magnitudes of insight are usually misinterpreted and abused during senseless adoption practices. When I release it, I will try to introduce the foundational concepts and insights for an effectively lucid reception.

This, however, is not a project of application. It is theoretical -- inherently it involves a lot more than merely fashioning a new paradigm of primitive representation -- so experimenting in the domain of software rasterization is only one part of my project.

For this topic, I intended to discuss CPU rasterization in general, both from algorithmic standpoints and a discussion analyzing hardware characteristics/implications with regards to software rendering.

For this topic, I intended to discuss CPU rasterization in general, both from algorithmic standpoints and a discussion analyzing hardware characteristics/implications with regards to software rendering.

I don't know your background and skillset, but judging from your posts i can see that you've got a good perspective about graphics programming generally. Still making claims like that makes you appear like a quack. Not that i want to diminish your rep or knowledge, i just don't know you any better to know what i can expect from a claim like that.

Reminds me of the Unlimited Detail claim that's been going around for a few years, which appears to be a glorified voxel/point cloud renderer.

On Topic though: I haven't worked with rasterization in detail. I know how it basically works technically, but my knowledge about it is just about good enough to be able to push vertices around on the gpu.

I didn't want to go this direction in the first place, but I also didn't want to leave you hanging. What else could I have done? Also, I did not make any claims in the first place. I merely explained why I didn't feel comfortable talking about it. It's quite deep and my most recent experiences with sharing ideas have taught me to fear arrogance.